"Take a hike, b*tch." - Woman Forced To Watch Her Baby Die Because Nebraska An

[MrsSmith]

kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list    Sat Mar-12-11 12:20 PM
Original message

"Take a hike, b*tch."   Updated at 12:37 PM
   
Edited on Sat Mar-12-11 12:27 PM by kpete
Woman Forced To Watch Her Baby Die Because Nebraska Anti-Abortion Law Prohibited Doctor From Acting
http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/10/nebraska-abortion-law-tragic

Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list    Sat Mar-12-11 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. The alleged "rights" of a fetus are not...
   
...greater than the rights of a living human being, the pregnant female. PERIOD and end of discussion.

I don't get this...glorifying the death of a baby so it can die in the mother's arms??? So it can suffer more??? These anti-choicer forced birthers are total assholes...without exception.

JMHO

Thirty-four-year-old Danielle Deaver was 23 weeks pregnant when she faced a fate “worse than your own death” — her baby would not make it. Her water broke early and, without amniotic fluid, the fetus would not develop lungs to survive outside the womb. Deaver and her husband decided they wanted to let “nature take it’s course” and would not risk harming the child further, so they asked their doctor to help “put an end to this nightmare.”

But because of Nebraska’s law prohibiting any abortion after 20 weeks, the doctor could not assist or he would “face criminal charges, jail time, and lose his medical license.” Her doctors told her “she’d just have to wait.” So she did, in “torture,” and gave birth to Elizabeth at 3pm, watched her gasp for breath, and then watched her die at 3:15pm on December 8, 2010. “The outcome of my pregnancy, that choice was made by God,” said Deaver, but “how to handle the end of my pregnancy, that choice should’ve been mine.”

rugdog [Moderator] Today 02:18 AM in reply to kasinca
How horrable for the baby. Why diden't the mother go to a state that permitted late term abortions? Why diden't Planned Paranthood help her get that done?

===================

Stoop_Solo [Moderator] 03/10/2011 06:27 PM
"The fetus can feel pain”, whereas a newborn baby slowly asphyxiating for 15 minutes feels positively elated.

=====================

Zooey [Moderator] 03/10/2011 06:29 PM
There's your death panel right there.

There's your dreaded "gubmint getting between me and my doctor."

There's your big government.

There's your typical repiggie 'let's torture a family just cuz we can' attitude.

========================

Austininc4 [Moderator] 03/10/2011 06:30 PM
Republicans at their very best, killing people. No parent should have to endure such pain and sorrow, because the state has decided to Police the lives of a mother and her unborn child.

We live in a very SICK NATION!!!!!

===========================

larkohio [Moderator] 03/10/2011 06:35 PM
This is a very cruel law. Did that little thing not suffer as she gasped for the breath she could not take? Does anyone care about that, or the pain that the parents endured as they watched her die? This should not be allowed to happen.

Exactly how can these idiots scream about the pain of a child born at 23 weeks, and still believe that killing that same child in the womb would NOT HURT????  Stupid, stupid, stupid!!!  Inserting a needle into her heart and installing a drug that makes it beat hard enough to rip apart doesn't HURT????  Shoving scissors into the back of her head and sucking out her brains doesn't HURT????  Burning her to death over hours and hours in salt water doesn't HURT?????  Do these idiots ever look into any of their "causes??"  Morons.   :censored:holes.  Butchers. 

[Vagabond]

23 Weeks?  It's a damn long shot, but haven't we saved babies younger than that.

[ChuckJ]

For some reason the other day I was thinking about the difference between liberals and conservatives. The first thing that came to mind was this:

Most conservatives believe that an innocent, unborn baby should be given the chance to live while it is acceptable to execute a convicted, cold-blooded murderer. On the other hand most liberals believe that a convicted, cold-blooded murder should be given the chance to live while it is acceptable to execute an innocent unborn baby.

I then began to wonder about the effects this had on the future of liberalcrat party. At first thought it appears that they were actually condoning the execution of potential future members of the liberalcrat party. But then it dawned on me. While a baby that is born and grown to voting age has about a fifty/fifty chance of voting with the liberals, there's always a chance he or she will vote with the conservatives; however, based on passed experience it seems that a DEAD individual general votes liberal 100% of the time.

So executions actually grow the liberal voting base, but if that was the case why would the support the execution of an innocent unborn baby but NOT the execution of a convicted, cold-blooded murderer? Then I remembered Chapter 1 of the book of Romans in the Bible. I won't post the whole chapter in respect to our non-believing friends here, but one of the many verses that describe and explain the liberals is "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools"

[CactusCarlos]

I then began to wonder about the effects this had on the future of liberalcrat party....

H5 for using the word "liberalcrat".

[Habsfan]

larkohio [Moderator] 03/10/2011 06:35 PM
This is a very cruel law. Did that little thing not suffer

Notice how they keep calling babies things?

They are following their evil agenda. That child was healthy and viable. She could have been sent to the NICU

She would have survived.

[thelaughingman]

23 Weeks?  It's a damn long shot, but haven't we saved babies younger than that.

Yes, though there's some wiggle room because it's not always clear what the exact date of conception is.

It seems pretty obvious from the story, once you wade through the fluff aimed to pull on your heart-strings and make you see abortion as some sort of noble choice, that they selfishly decided that they didn't want the chance of having to care for a developmentally and physically disabled child.

"They decided: There are worse things than death."

Having a chance to live is worse than death?  Living a life with disabilities is worse than death?

[MrsSmith]

Yes, though there's some wiggle room because it's not always clear what the exact date of conception is.

It seems pretty obvious from the story, once you wade through the fluff aimed to pull on your heart-strings and make you see abortion as some sort of noble choice, that they selfishly decided that they didn't want the chance of having to care for a developmentally and physically disabled child.

"They decided: There are worse things than death."

Having a chance to live is worse than death?  Living a life with disabilities is worse than death?

What strikes me hardest about the whole thing, in every article, is that the mother (and all the rest of the pro-abortion crowd) seem to really believe that the child just couldn't feel any pain in the womb, but somehow, magically, could feel it after leaving the womb.  Like the birth process actually changes the child into "something else?"  Of course, maybe that is what they think, it certainly fits with their abortion talking points.   
I can see how this would be horrible for the parents...but how could it have been less horrible if they'd chosen to murder the child??  Did they look into any of the options for abortion?  They most compassionate way to let that poor baby die was by inducing labor...meaning the baby would die exactly the same way.  The only difference would be for the parents!  Are they seriously so self-centered that they couldn't give their own child a few extra days of comfort in the womb, they just wanted her dead right now?    The whole thing sickens me.  How can they all possibly think that deliberately killing the child is somehow more compassionate? 
And for the mother to use an incident like this to promote killing the unborn, what kind of mother is she?

[diesel driver]

...And for the mother to use an incident like this to promote killing the unborn, what kind of mother is she?

Never let a good story tragedy go to waste. 

It's the Demonrat way.

[thelaughingman]

What strikes me hardest about the whole thing, in every article, is that the mother (and all the rest of the pro-abortion crowd) seem to really believe that the child just couldn't feel any pain in the womb, but somehow, magically, could feel it after leaving the womb.  Like the birth process actually changes the child into "something else?"  Of course, maybe that is what they think, it certainly fits with their abortion talking points.   
I can see how this would be horrible for the parents...but how could it have been less horrible if they'd chosen to murder the child??  Did they look into any of the options for abortion?  They most compassionate way to let that poor baby die was by inducing labor...meaning the baby would die exactly the same way.  The only difference would be for the parents!  Are they seriously so self-centered that they couldn't give their own child a few extra days of comfort in the womb, they just wanted her dead right now?    The whole thing sickens me.  How can they all possibly think that deliberately killing the child is somehow more compassionate? 
And for the mother to use an incident like this to promote killing the unborn, what kind of mother is she?

AMEN!!!!

If I were given the choice, I'd rather know and love the child for the few moments s/he lived than to turn him/her into some unrecognizable, inhuman remains in order to supposedly spare my feelings.  The old saying is 100% right and 100% accurate and applicable: "It's better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all."